2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds :

"1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of learned Assessing Officer in disallowing expenditure of Rs. 17,88.062 being overload charges incurred in the normal course of business of the assessee by treating the same as penalty without appreciating the true and correct nature of such expenditure.

2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in not following the order of his predecessor for assessment year 2004-05 wherein under identical circumstances, such expenditure has been deleted by learned CIT(A).

3. Both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in not properly appreciating and considering various submissions, evidences and supporting (sic) placed on record during the course of the assessment proceedings and not properly appreciating various facts and law in its proper perspective and further erred in passing orders in gross violation of the principles of natural justice.

4. Learned